<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (2) TMI 664 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375037</link>
    <description>Entitlement to credit or refund under Notification No. 56/2002-CE, as amended, depended on the scope and operation of the exemption regime governing refund availability to the manufacturer. The claim was treated as covered by an earlier jurisdictional HC decision, followed by a later Tribunal order on the same controversy, so the settled interpretation of the notification regime applied. On that basis, the demand for alleged excess credit could not be sustained, and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2019 06:17:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=557748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 664 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375037</link>
      <description>Entitlement to credit or refund under Notification No. 56/2002-CE, as amended, depended on the scope and operation of the exemption regime governing refund availability to the manufacturer. The claim was treated as covered by an earlier jurisdictional HC decision, followed by a later Tribunal order on the same controversy, so the settled interpretation of the notification regime applied. On that basis, the demand for alleged excess credit could not be sustained, and the impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375037</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>